Assessment sheet for Celtic Seas sub-region and for seven subdivisions

Celtic Seas

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 1.08
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.54
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.33
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.22
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.46
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Upper bathyal sediment 156.05 10560 5424.91 85.04 225.50 1.45 0.59 0.39 0.24
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 140.82 11795 412.68 126.47 246.62 1.75 0.87 0.53 0.26
Abyssal 138.24 8092 3.75 0.23 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02
Offshore circalittoral sand 127.05 11354 4314.02 91.26 242.04 1.91 0.93 0.73 0.39
Lower bathyal sediment 113.95 7970 1.35 0.22 0.30 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.03
Offshore circalittoral mud 64.60 5416 3292.64 95.00 237.11 3.67 0.99 0.87 0.42
Upper bathyal sediment or Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 43.09 2781 3290.53 10.83 31.35 0.73 0.62 0.23 0.14
Unknown 42.64 5895 1199.86 8.21 21.04 0.49 0.68 0.25 0.12
Lower bathyal sediment or Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef 33.95 2276 17.73 0.18 0.11 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.07
Circalittoral coarse sediment 20.60 3545 4.04 7.78 5.62 0.27 0.75 0.17 0.15
Circalittoral sand 11.16 2422 3.08 2.38 3.72 0.33 0.65 0.19 0.14
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 9.41 1788 5.19 5.93 9.29 0.99 0.76 0.30 0.17
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 9.27 3547 2.14 1.45 1.88 0.20 0.57 0.14 0.15
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 6.82 3224 2.08 3.33 6.31 0.93 0.79 0.30 0.14
Circalittoral mud 4.82 1231 5.93 1.66 3.56 0.74 0.77 0.34 0.17
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.96 2159 0.27 0.45 0.31 0.16 0.50 0.10 0.11
Infralittoral sand 1.96 951 0.61 1.55 1.24 0.63 0.52 0.20 0.03
Infralittoral coarse sediment 1.27 944 0.87 1.78 0.68 0.54 0.63 0.19 0.04
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.96 588 0.12 0.30 0.34 0.36 0.71 0.25 0.20
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.81 329 1.78 0.15 0.18 0.22 0.24 0.10 0.05
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.48 179 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Infralittoral mud 0.40 440 0.02 0.10 0.04 0.10 0.36 0.07 0.10
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.19 238 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.11 0.34 0.08 0.10

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 8.15 154.88 761.85 25.05 0.27 17.06 59.40 0.01 22.23 0.00
Landings (1000 tonnes) 16.39 19.74 17912.49 9.16 11.78 0.94 6.15 0.00 11.05 0.00
Value (10^6 euro) 32.39 77.69 263.54 21.90 5.09 1.82 10.66 0.02 36.89 0.00
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 2.01 0.13 23.51 0.37 44.30 0.06 0.10 0.40 0.50 4.11
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 3.97 0.50 0.35 0.87 19.14 0.11 0.18 2.40 1.66 10.59

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 41.25 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 67.63 93.01 92.83
10 NA NA 73.60 87.32 84.21
15 NA NA 77.67 81.52 76.68
20 NA NA 80.86 75.91 68.93
30 NA NA 85.64 64.87 58.36
40 NA NA 89.08 55.42 48.73
60 NA NA 94.23 35.74 31.99
80 NA NA 97.92 15.95 14.11
99 NA NA 99.97 0.30 0.01

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 12.66 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 52.82 90.54 83.74
10 NA NA 61.23 83.63 62.37
15 NA NA 66.71 77.58 38.44
20 NA NA 70.88 72.04 29.29
30 NA NA 77.68 60.70 13.55
40 NA NA 83.00 50.44 10.85
60 NA NA 91.06 32.11 4.64
80 NA NA 96.63 15.37 2.08
99 NA NA 99.90 0.96 0.10

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 95.65 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 96.99 95.99 56.46
10 NA NA 97.62 87.89 34.95
15 NA NA 98.02 77.86 18.55
20 NA NA 98.34 70.61 14.11
30 NA NA 98.81 68.25 14.05
40 NA NA 99.22 66.70 14.02
60 NA NA 99.75 47.66 1.33
80 NA NA 99.92 22.62 0.69
99 NA NA 100.00 3.73 0.12

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 6.51 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 33.12 91.54 96.03
10 NA NA 42.72 84.60 90.15
15 NA NA 50.34 78.62 81.98
20 NA NA 56.70 73.12 73.24
30 NA NA 67.03 63.22 56.67
40 NA NA 75.41 53.40 39.55
60 NA NA 87.79 34.19 15.85
80 NA NA 95.90 16.09 2.40
99 NA NA 99.93 0.52 0.03

Northern area

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 1.37
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.57
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.38
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.25
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.43
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Upper bathyal sediment 32.92 2415 27.38 15.00 69.22 2.10 0.51 0.39 0.24
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 22.45 2170 10.88 16.21 24.51 1.09 0.86 0.46 0.32
Lower bathyal sediment 21.35 1596 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offshore circalittoral sand 21.06 2069 18.05 20.05 48.76 2.32 0.95 0.76 0.42
Circalittoral coarse sediment 1.36 447 0.12 0.27 0.25 0.18 0.83 0.14 0.23
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.29 444 0.21 0.33 0.31 0.24 0.69 0.19 0.18
Unknown 1.02 426 0.13 0.28 0.24 0.23 0.62 0.14 0.13
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.81 128 1.16 1.64 3.32 4.08 0.99 0.95 0.40
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.59 356 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.34 0.05 0.15
Lower bathyal sediment or Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.49 78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.34 381 0.17 0.22 0.20 0.58 0.85 0.35 0.22
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.27 97 0.20 0.17 0.46 1.70 0.81 0.55 0.21
Upper bathyal sediment or Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.17 27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.07
Circalittoral sand 0.15 122 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.25 0.86 0.21 0.17
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.08 92 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.47 0.06 0.11
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.06 34 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.39 0.09 0.15
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.05 37 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.40 0.10 0.05
Circalittoral mud 0.04 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.11
Abyssal 0.02 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA
Infralittoral mud 0.02 21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14
Infralittoral sand 0.02 26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.54 0.08 0.15

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 0.21 0.13 126.53 1.64 0.01 11.07 7.90 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 0.37 0.03 52.48 0.51 2.91 0.55 1.55 0 0 0
Value (10^6 euro) 0.68 0.02 46.59 1.13 2.32 1.00 2.61 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 1.74 0.26 0.41 0.31 207.54 0.05 0.20 NA NA NA
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 3.17 0.17 0.37 0.69 165.69 0.09 0.33 NA NA NA

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 48.86 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 70.07 93.88 94.15
10 NA NA 75.62 89.20 89.07
15 NA NA 79.42 84.92 84.84
20 NA NA 82.37 80.56 80.23
30 NA NA 86.86 72.47 69.71
40 NA NA 90.36 64.48 59.59
60 NA NA 95.22 43.87 36.70
80 NA NA 98.36 21.87 15.39
99 NA NA 100.00 0.54 0.42

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 14.03 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 52.05 91.81 88.71
10 NA NA 61.38 85.07 81.32
15 NA NA 67.82 79.84 76.81
20 NA NA 73.37 73.65 70.89
30 NA NA 81.36 62.79 61.55
40 NA NA 86.79 53.03 52.95
60 NA NA 94.29 28.66 31.03
80 NA NA 98.22 11.55 15.24
99 NA NA 100.00 0.33 0.47

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 99.93 NA 100
5 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
10 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
15 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
20 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
30 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
40 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
60 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
80 NA NA 100.00 NA 100
99 NA NA 100.00 NA 100

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 4.81 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 32.36 90.49 91.64
10 NA NA 43.18 84.30 85.43
15 NA NA 51.58 78.91 79.26
20 NA NA 58.62 72.98 72.29
30 NA NA 69.87 63.36 61.26
40 NA NA 78.54 54.54 51.33
60 NA NA 89.71 38.23 33.64
80 NA NA 96.26 19.13 15.08
99 NA NA 99.93 1.28 0.99

Offshore deep

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 0.42
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.28
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.14
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.09
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.72
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Abyssal 138.22 8088 3.75 0.23 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02
Upper bathyal sediment 118.62 7659 5029.21 62.18 139.81 1.18 0.60 0.37 0.22
Lower bathyal sediment 92.60 6374 1.35 0.22 0.29 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.03
Upper bathyal sediment or Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 41.60 2587 3001.99 9.84 28.05 0.67 0.61 0.21 0.13
Lower bathyal sediment or Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef 33.46 2198 17.73 0.18 0.11 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.07
Offshore circalittoral mud 7.11 598 41.13 3.42 6.05 0.85 0.94 0.57 0.41
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 2.10 222 2.71 2.30 3.39 1.61 0.93 0.56 0.33
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.98 177 0.13 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.57 0.02 0.34
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.81 319 1.37 0.15 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.09 0.05
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.48 179 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.26 51 10.42 0.34 0.56 2.14 0.83 0.68 0.29
Unknown 0.16 35 20.73 0.15 0.35 2.14 1.00 0.79 0.46
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.16 25 0.37 1.54 2.53 16.30 0.90 0.69 0.16

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 0.00 26.70 144.41 10.02 0.07 0.09 0.20 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 0.01 1.86 8118.54 4.08 6.33 0.01 0.06 0 0 0
Value (10^6 euro) 0.02 12.99 56.72 10.28 0.42 0.03 0.09 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 1.69 0.07 56.22 0.41 87.03 0.14 0.29 NA 0 NA
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 6.25 0.49 0.39 1.03 5.82 0.33 0.48 NA 0 NA

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 95.65 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 96.99 95.99 56.46
10 NA NA 97.62 87.89 34.95
15 NA NA 98.02 77.86 18.55
20 NA NA 98.34 70.61 14.11
30 NA NA 98.81 68.25 14.05
40 NA NA 99.22 66.70 14.02
60 NA NA 99.75 47.66 1.33
80 NA NA 99.92 22.62 0.69
99 NA NA 100.00 3.73 0.12

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 40.71 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 68.32 93.57 94.15
10 NA NA 74.19 87.94 87.00
15 NA NA 78.20 82.65 79.54
20 NA NA 81.34 77.08 73.08
30 NA NA 86.03 65.96 62.02
40 NA NA 89.39 55.96 51.48
60 NA NA 94.13 36.84 36.27
80 NA NA 97.59 18.49 20.41
99 NA NA 99.92 1.14 1.00

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 94.16 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 96.59 94.71 59.39
10 NA NA 97.44 89.68 39.33
15 NA NA 98.02 87.48 33.27
20 NA NA 98.53 85.26 29.95
30 NA NA 99.27 79.54 12.01
40 NA NA 99.57 71.39 6.42
60 NA NA 99.82 49.20 4.12
80 NA NA 99.93 26.63 2.63
99 NA NA 100.00 3.42 0.25

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 39.40 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 81.24 89.37 96.89
10 NA NA 85.19 81.63 93.19
15 NA NA 87.44 75.64 90.51
20 NA NA 89.04 70.12 87.48
30 NA NA 91.56 58.84 80.25
40 NA NA 93.45 48.55 70.88
60 NA NA 96.28 31.29 49.15
80 NA NA 98.37 16.12 23.29
99 NA NA 99.95 1.08 1.55

Irish Sea

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 1.07
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.75
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.27
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.17
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.25
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 15.80 1425 6.72 9.32 3.99 0.25 0.91 0.20 0.30
Offshore circalittoral mud 8.08 721 7.99 22.95 51.12 6.33 1.00 0.91 0.43
Offshore circalittoral sand 6.95 1025 2.27 4.60 5.23 0.75 0.97 0.38 0.24
Circalittoral coarse sediment 5.28 777 0.84 1.99 0.83 0.16 0.78 0.13 0.16
Circalittoral sand 4.70 883 0.44 0.88 0.84 0.18 0.62 0.12 0.14
Circalittoral mud 3.00 496 0.25 0.64 1.58 0.53 0.78 0.24 0.17
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 2.61 568 1.74 2.21 1.06 0.41 0.92 0.27 0.22
Unknown 2.23 925 0.24 0.36 0.38 0.17 0.51 0.09 0.12
Infralittoral sand 0.92 401 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.05 0.41 0.03 0.09
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.88 526 0.22 0.24 0.39 0.44 0.97 0.16 0.22
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.85 495 0.14 0.33 0.38 0.44 0.83 0.28 0.13
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.50 253 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.26 0.75 0.19 0.19
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.48 249 0.11 0.24 0.06 0.12 0.53 0.08 0.06
Infralittoral mud 0.20 153 0.02 0.08 0.02 0.09 0.48 0.07 0.12
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.18 400 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.33 0.58 0.13 0.12
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.05 80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.48 0.11 0.11

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 3.92 52.58 6.12 1.00 0 0 1.32 0.01 1.64 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 9.09 7.87 2.47 0.88 0 0 0.28 0.00 0.69 0
Value (10^6 euro) 15.70 23.54 2.15 0.79 0 0 0.46 0.02 2.01 0
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 2.32 0.15 0.40 0.88 NA NA 0.21 0.43 0.42 NA
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 4.01 0.45 0.35 0.80 NA NA 0.35 2.92 1.23 NA

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 8.92 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 51.83 97.05 92.77
10 NA NA 63.92 93.39 86.01
15 NA NA 71.06 89.25 81.56
20 NA NA 76.23 85.92 78.62
30 NA NA 83.35 74.00 70.32
40 NA NA 87.96 60.32 58.45
60 NA NA 94.56 33.26 33.78
80 NA NA 98.25 13.45 14.78
99 NA NA 100.00 0.34 0.21

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 0.13 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 25.04 94.15 93.06
10 NA NA 32.54 89.60 88.27
15 NA NA 38.70 85.15 83.35
20 NA NA 43.90 80.76 78.04
30 NA NA 53.40 72.22 68.11
40 NA NA 62.15 63.86 58.25
60 NA NA 77.58 45.65 37.36
80 NA NA 90.24 25.19 18.82
99 NA NA 99.77 1.70 1.35

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 2.87 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 43.29 92.45 85.32
10 NA NA 58.85 86.62 80.53
15 NA NA 66.95 79.86 73.67
20 NA NA 72.39 72.83 67.00
30 NA NA 81.28 58.91 53.24
40 NA NA 85.64 51.70 47.65
60 NA NA 93.01 31.28 27.90
80 NA NA 97.53 11.54 9.88
99 NA NA 100.00 1.38 1.29

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 22.04 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 61.15 94.25 93.02
10 NA NA 69.75 90.90 89.63
15 NA NA 75.37 85.08 84.36
20 NA NA 79.07 79.75 79.32
30 NA NA 84.57 69.45 70.41
40 NA NA 89.19 59.11 62.06
60 NA NA 95.32 34.16 42.86
80 NA NA 98.68 12.58 21.37
99 NA NA 100.00 1.51 3.20

Centre area

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 0.58
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.63
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.23
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.17
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.37
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 34.97 3435 6.14 6.70 7.07 0.20 0.65 0.13 0.19
Unknown 31.43 3335 170.17 4.13 7.92 0.25 0.63 0.13 0.13
Offshore circalittoral sand 24.31 2897 45.86 9.03 16.96 0.70 0.72 0.33 0.18
Offshore circalittoral mud 12.43 1405 33.25 15.68 32.62 2.62 0.96 0.74 0.33
Circalittoral coarse sediment 6.60 1339 0.49 1.12 0.80 0.12 0.60 0.10 0.18
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 4.09 623 0.46 0.98 1.77 0.43 0.62 0.18 0.17
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 4.08 1591 0.24 0.40 0.49 0.12 0.40 0.08 0.13
Upper bathyal sediment 3.39 336 224.21 6.62 12.67 3.74 1.00 0.89 0.44
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 2.93 1416 0.23 0.37 0.54 0.18 0.57 0.11 0.15
Circalittoral sand 2.78 731 0.30 0.56 0.95 0.34 0.58 0.19 0.13
Circalittoral mud 1.26 484 0.37 0.89 1.65 1.31 0.83 0.57 0.19
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.62 869 0.05 0.14 0.14 0.22 0.51 0.13 0.09
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.25 311 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.09 0.43 0.07 0.16
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.21 208 0.05 0.14 0.14 0.67 0.70 0.37 0.22
Infralittoral sand 0.11 162 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.50 0.08 0.10
Infralittoral mud 0.08 165 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.19 0.47 0.14 0.16
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.07 90 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.27 0.06 0.16
Upper bathyal sediment or Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.03 37 3.03 0.06 0.13 3.83 1.00 0.84 0.19

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 1.04 30.43 48.37 0.93 0.01 0.05 3.77 0.00 0.00 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 1.81 4.23 475.65 0.56 2.30 0.01 0.53 0.00 0.00 0
Value (10^6 euro) 4.20 16.64 22.99 0.87 2.00 0.01 0.84 0.00 0.00 0
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 1.75 0.14 9.83 0.60 244.92 0.14 0.14 0.29 0.73 NA
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 4.04 0.55 0.48 0.93 213.07 0.23 0.22 1.36 2.49 NA

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 35.26 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 68.85 87.60 78.69
10 NA NA 78.56 81.05 73.81
15 NA NA 83.97 73.33 67.78
20 NA NA 87.19 66.34 61.71
30 NA NA 91.54 56.12 53.08
40 NA NA 94.41 48.12 45.43
60 NA NA 97.71 32.25 29.73
80 NA NA 99.17 16.41 11.45
99 NA NA 100.00 1.44 0.81

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 37.25 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 73.70 90.68 99.13
10 NA NA 83.76 82.39 98.18
15 NA NA 87.81 76.38 96.43
20 NA NA 90.34 70.44 93.53
30 NA NA 92.95 60.95 89.64
40 NA NA 95.01 49.18 77.11
60 NA NA 97.52 35.10 48.94
80 NA NA 99.00 20.31 22.94
99 NA NA 100.00 5.31 1.44

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 28.28 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 63.43 90.92 97.27
10 NA NA 71.39 84.61 94.20
15 NA NA 75.63 79.03 90.37
20 NA NA 79.00 73.61 88.45
30 NA NA 84.22 61.32 84.99
40 NA NA 88.06 52.12 77.16
60 NA NA 93.68 34.96 54.48
80 NA NA 97.56 16.35 31.95
99 NA NA 99.92 0.90 0.75

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 3.86 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 35.84 94.43 60.23
10 NA NA 45.03 89.73 32.52
15 NA NA 51.32 85.17 21.37
20 NA NA 56.83 80.83 14.09
30 NA NA 66.16 71.90 8.51
40 NA NA 73.46 63.97 7.33
60 NA NA 85.21 46.32 4.87
80 NA NA 93.62 26.20 2.48
99 NA NA 99.87 0.75 0.10

Southern area

Summary

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Table 1

Table 1. Pressure and impact indicators for 2013-2018
Indicators values
Intensity (I-1) 2.57
Proportion of area in fished cells (I-2) 0.94
Proportion of area fished per year (I-3) 0.79
Smallest prop. of area in fished cells with 90% of fishing effort (I-4) 0.56
Proportion of area in unfished cells (I-5) 0.06
Average PD impact NA
Average L1 impact NA
Proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 NA
Proportion of area with L1 impact < 0.2 NA

Figure 1

**Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018**

Figure 1 Geographic distribution of surface abrasion, seabed sensitivity (not shown) and total value and weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear. The maps of surface abrasion, value and weight show the average per year for 2013-2018

Pressure

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Figure 2

**Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle**

Figure 2 Fishing intensity, Swept Area Ratio, by mobile bottom-contacting gears (year-1), averaged for the 2013-2018 six-year cycle

Table 2

Table 2 Overview of pressure indicators of all mobile bottom-contacting gears per broad-scale habitat averaged for 2013-2018. I refers to the indicators in Table 1.
MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat 1000 km2 Number of grid cells Landings 1000 tonnes Value 10 6 euro Swept area 1000 km2 Average fishing intensity I 1 Prop of area in fished grid cells I 2 Prop of area fished per year I 3 Smallest prop of area with 90 of fishing effort I 4
Offshore circalittoral sand 74.47 5312 4237.43 57.25 170.53 2.29 1.00 0.88 0.55
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 65.50 4543 386.24 91.94 207.65 3.17 0.98 0.85 0.48
Offshore circalittoral mud 36.17 2564 3209.11 51.30 144.01 3.98 1.00 0.96 0.52
Unknown 7.79 1174 1008.59 3.29 12.16 1.56 0.92 0.76 0.27
Circalittoral coarse sediment 7.36 982 2.59 4.39 3.73 0.51 0.86 0.26 0.19
Circalittoral sand 3.54 686 2.32 0.91 1.88 0.53 0.74 0.29 0.17
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 3.05 1017 1.55 0.38 0.71 0.23 0.67 0.17 0.21
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 2.51 876 1.09 0.97 2.65 1.06 0.96 0.55 0.31
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 1.45 323 2.66 2.55 5.97 4.12 0.97 0.88 0.33
Upper bathyal sediment or Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 1.29 130 285.50 0.93 3.16 2.45 1.00 0.89 0.58
Upper bathyal sediment 1.12 150 144.11 1.24 3.80 3.38 1.00 0.99 0.44
Infralittoral sand 0.91 362 0.57 1.39 1.18 1.31 0.63 0.39 0.06
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.58 534 0.18 0.23 0.07 0.13 0.65 0.09 0.12
Circalittoral mud 0.52 233 5.32 0.12 0.32 0.62 0.64 0.32 0.14
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.47 292 0.75 1.51 0.60 1.27 0.85 0.38 0.08
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.19 93 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.35 0.74 0.32 0.23
Infralittoral mud 0.11 101 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.04
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.02 31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.03
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef 0.01 10 0.41 0.00 0.01 1.31 1.00 0.70 NA

Figure 3

**Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).**

Figure 3. Time series of (a) mean fishing intensity (surface abrasion), (b) proportion of the surface area of the seafloor fished, (c) aggregation of fishing (proportion of the surface area with 90% of the fishing effort) by habitat. Results represent vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018).

Figure 4

**Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.**

Figure 4. Cumulative proportion of the swept area, landings and value. Grid cells were sorted from highest to lowest fishing intensity and include non-fished cells. The results are for all mobile bottom-contacting gears based on averaged fishing data per c-square from 2013-2018.

Core fishing grounds

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Figure 5

**Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018**

Figure 5. Number of years c-squares are within the 90% core fishing grounds by metier during the period 2013-2018

Figure 6

**Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground**

Figure 6. Percentage area overlap between the 90% highest value per year and the reference core? fishing ground

Figure 7

**Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year**

Figure 7. percent area fished vs. landings value (euro) by métier, coloured by year

Fishing by métier

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

Mauris varius lorem consectetur, volutpat urna in, volutpat massa. Nam congue, mauris nec ullamcorper congue, quam dui condimentum sem, mattis egestas est orci in massa. Duis faucibus egestas erat eu placerat. Praesent eleifend euismod rutrum. Morbi eget laoreet justo, vitae finibus justo. In vitae lacus a turpis pretium facilisis et et magna. Duis pretium diam finibus est consectetur, ut posuere risus faucibus. Donec mi orci, pellentesque ac dui id, vulputate volutpat leo. Proin quis gravida nulla. Vestibulum lobortis sit amet neque nec pulvinar. Phasellus id tortor congue, aliquet nulla at, venenatis turpis. Cras semper diam vitae gravida ultricies. Donec eu ultricies diam. Aliquam mattis interdum maximus. Proin sed lacus nibh.

Table 3

Table 3. Overview of area fished (sum of swept area), landings and value for the different metiers. Area fished in 1000 km2, weight of landings in 1000 tonnes, value of landings in 10^6 euro.
X DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MIX OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 2.98 45.03 436.42 11.46 0.17 5.85 46.20 0.00 20.60 0.00
Landings (1000 tonnes) 5.11 5.74 9263.35 3.12 0.24 0.37 3.73 0.00 10.37 0.00
Value (10^6 euro) 11.79 24.50 135.10 8.83 0.34 0.78 6.65 0.00 34.88 0.00
Landings (1000 tonnes)/Area swept (1000 km2) 1.72 0.13 21.23 0.27 1.41 0.06 0.08 0.38 0.50 4.11
Value (10^6 euro)/Area swept (1000 km2) 3.96 0.54 0.31 0.77 2.01 0.13 0.14 0.36 1.69 10.59

Impact

No information available

Manangement scenarios

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Etiam vehicula scelerisque ligula et eleifend. Nulla lacus velit, tristique a nunc vel, scelerisque porttitor mauris. Vivamus ligula arcu, posuere imperdiet auctor ut, rutrum non tortor. Phasellus feugiat libero nisi. Suspendisse pretium justo ligula, nec ornare lorem molestie nec. Sed suscipit nisl eu eleifend sollicitudin. Curabitur tincidunt blandit sapien, non fermentum eros pretium a. Pellentesque fringilla ac nisl vel mattis. In at dui eget arcu eleifend convallis. Fusce luctus eros vel sapien condimentum, et lobortis nisl vehicula. Aenean hendrerit egestas odio, vel eleifend ipsum tempor id. Phasellus id magna cursus, ornare arcu finibus, tempus nulla. Aenean eu eros sit amet neque convallis mollis sit amet vitae justo. Donec consectetur in nibh id sagittis.

MSFD habitat - 1

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 0.18 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 19.65 93.02 93.98
10 NA NA 30.66 86.32 86.57
15 NA NA 39.39 80.49 77.56
20 NA NA 46.87 75.11 68.62
30 NA NA 59.44 65.00 51.44
40 NA NA 69.45 54.99 35.98
60 NA NA 84.61 35.07 14.54
80 NA NA 94.78 16.20 2.25
99 NA NA 99.93 0.54 0.01

MSFD habitat - 2

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 1.49 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 27.30 94.41 64.87
10 NA NA 37.53 88.93 35.92
15 NA NA 45.13 83.17 27.00
20 NA NA 51.55 77.34 16.69
30 NA NA 62.21 65.56 12.06
40 NA NA 70.85 55.41 6.49
60 NA NA 84.46 34.96 4.14
80 NA NA 93.99 16.96 1.76
99 NA NA 99.80 0.91 0.09

MSFD habitat - 3

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 0.02 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 20.04 95.28 85.29
10 NA NA 33.56 90.74 69.55
15 NA NA 44.04 86.58 56.10
20 NA NA 52.18 82.75 43.47
30 NA NA 65.15 74.39 23.20
40 NA NA 74.74 65.43 12.23
60 NA NA 88.49 46.77 0.82
80 NA NA 96.36 26.19 0.13
99 NA NA 99.89 1.66 0.01

MSFD habitat - 4

**Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.**

Multi-purpose habitat management trade-off for the most extensive MSFD habitat type.

Table presenting a similar overview as above, while including weight of landings
Effort reduction PD impact L1 impact Unfished area Decline in value Decline in weight
0 NA NA 7.57 100.00 100.00
5 NA NA 28.42 93.86 97.91
10 NA NA 35.42 88.72 94.72
15 NA NA 40.95 84.00 90.17
20 NA NA 46.33 79.28 84.40
30 NA NA 55.85 69.82 74.62
40 NA NA 65.10 60.32 62.73
60 NA NA 80.50 40.92 39.12
80 NA NA 92.28 20.98 17.86
99 NA NA 100.00 0.82 0.00